A new survey from Findlaw.com has revealed that most Americans can’t name a single U.S. Supreme Court justice. Only 1% could name all 9 justices (I have to admit I spaced on Anthony Kennedy as I went through the conservative and liberal justices in my head but got him after 10 seconds of searching), and only 35% could name a single justice. Clarence Thomas, at 19%, was the most known justice, still living off the remembrances of the Coke can and his “high-tech lynching.” The full results follow:

Putting this into perspective, Yahoo News reported that “more Americans could identify Michael Jackson as the composer of “Beat It” and “Billie Jean” than could identify the Bill of Rights as a body of amendments to the Constitution” and that “more than a third did not know the century in which the American Revolution took place, and half of respondents believed that either the Civil War, the Emancipation Proclamation or the War of 1812 occurred before the American Revolution.”

The question is, who cares? If most Americans know more about the winners of American Idol than the nine justices who make decisions that will affect their lives for decades to come (or that most think that foreign aid is 20% of the US federal budget, whereas it’s less than 1%), does it really make a difference in the life of the body politic?

To quote Sarah Palin, “You betcha’.” While knowing who our Supreme Court justices are may be “mere trivia,” it underscores a disturbing fact that in a democracy (or democratic republic), we hold this truth to be self-evident: that what the public thinks matters and that politicians need to listen to what the public says. But, what if the public knows little? We all know the vulgar saying about opinions and a particular body part: everyone has them. And, unfortunately, many people think that facts and opinions are the same thing, not adhering to Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s maxim: “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”

I am not suggesting that public opinion doesn’t–or shouldn’t–matter, but politicians should be wary of determining public policy based on polls. What percentage of Americans support drilling for oil offshore? Do you think that taxes are too high? Do you support Barack Obama’s health-care policy? Do you think that the United States should enforce stricter sanctions on Iran? All of these are simple–if complex–questions that pollsters can ask about and return a result with a neat little bow for policymakers and candidates, who can in turn engineer commercials, sound bites, and policies to mesh with the zeitgeist or to downplay their opinions on matters where they disagree with what the majority believe. Too bad that many politicians slavishly follow public opinion (or paper over their opinions that are out of step with it) rather than trying to lead it.

What compounds the issue, of course, is that politicians are not the sole decision makers. In many parts of the country, there is hyper-direct democracy, in which voters are asked to cast judgments on laws directly–be it about physician-assisted suicide, casino gambling, or same-sex marriage. How can we ask the public to make such profound decisions on the basis of very little knowledge?